M/S Aman Trading Corp., Jammu v. The Income Tax Officer,, Jammu

MA 5/ASR/2016 | 1997-1998
Pronouncement Date: 30-09-2016 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 520924 RSA 2016
Assessee PAN AAMFA5704F
Bench Amritsar
Appeal Number MA 5/ASR/2016
Duration Of Justice 11 month(s) 7 day(s)
Appellant M/S Aman Trading Corp., Jammu
Respondent The Income Tax Officer,, Jammu
Appeal Type Miscellaneous Application
Pronouncement Date 30-09-2016
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted DB
Tribunal Order Date 30-09-2016
Date Of Final Hearing 30-09-2016
Next Hearing Date 30-09-2016
Assessment Year 1997-1998
Appeal Filed On 23-10-2015
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH; AMRITSAR BEFORE SH.T.S. KAPOOR ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH.N.K.CHOUDHRY JUDICIAL MEMBER M. A. NO.05(ASR)/2016 (ARISING OUT OF I.T.A NO.255(ASR)/2013) ASSESSMENT YEAR: -1997-98 M/S. AMAN TRADING CORP. 6 RANBIR MARKET JAMMU. PAN:AAMFA5704F VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-2(2) JAMMU. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY: SH. INDERJIT PAUL (ADV .) RESPONDENT BY: SH. RAHUL DHAWAN (DR) DATE OF HEARING: 30.09.2016 DATE OF PRONOU NCEMENT: 30.09.2016 ORDER PER N. K. CHOUDHRY (JM): THE PRESENT MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILE D BY THE ASSESSEE FOR RECALLING THE EX-PARTE ORDER OF THE TR IBUNAL DATED 16.09.2015 PASSED IN ITA NO.255(ASR)/2013 FOR ASST . YEAR:1997-98. 2. AT THE OUTSET THE LEARNED AR CONTENDED THAT THE ASSESSEE COULD NOT ATTEND THE HEARING ON 27.08.2015 AS NO NOTICE W AS EVER SERVED UPON THE ASSESSEE OR HIS COUNSEL AS THE FIRM WAS CLOSED. HOWEVER THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FILED THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS MENTIONING T HEREIN THE REASONS FOR NON ATTENDANCE WHICH ARE REPRODUCED AS UNDER: 1. APROPOS OF THE ABOVE THE APPELLANT IS IN RECEI PT OF THE ORDER DATED: 16 TH SEPTEMBER 2015 DISMISSING OUR ABOVE APPEAL BECAUSE OF NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SENT AT THE GIVEN ADDRESS WHICH HAS BEEN RETURN ED BY THE POSTAL AUTHORITIES WITH THE REMARK FIRM CLOSED. NONE WAS APPEARED TO ARGUE MA NO.05(ASR)/2016 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.255(ASR)/2016 ASST. YEAR :1997-98 2 OUR CASE ON 27TH AUGUST 2015 WHEN IT WAS FIXED FOR HEARING BEFORE THE HONBLE BENCH. 2. IT IS SUBMITTED THAT AS PER PROGRESS OF HEARIN GS REPORT FROM OUR LD COUNSEL SH. INDERJIT PAUL ADVOCATE HE HAD BEEN RE GULARLY ATTENDING ALL HEARINGS AFTER FILING OF APPEAL AND PAPER BOOK COM PLYING WITH THE DIRECTIONS OF THE HONBLE BENCH HAD BEEN FILING VAR IOUS DOCUMENTS ETC. TIME TO TIME. 3. ON THE IMPUGNED DATE OF HEARING IT JUST SO H APPENED THAT THE NOTICE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL ON 27 TH AUGUST 2015 WAS SENT AT THE GIVEN ADDRESS AT COLUMN 10 OF FORM NO.36. IN THIS COLUMN SECOND O NE IS C/O SH. R.C. KHANNA CA ONLY BECAUSE OF CONVENIENCE OF SERVICE OF STATUTORY NOTICES. SH. R.C. KHANNA CA WAS OUR PREVIOUS COUNSEL AND DUE TO BAD PATCH OF HIS HEALTH HE HAD WITHDRAWN HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY LATE R ON AND THEREAFTER OUR PRESENT COUNSEL SH. INDERJIT PAUL ADVOCATE HAS STEP PED INTO THE SHOES OF OUR PREVIOUS COUNSEL. WE WOULD LIKE TO INVITE YOUR HONORS KIND ATTENTION THAT OUR FIRM WAS A PARTNERSHIP FIRM OF TEN PARTNER S AND CARRIED BUSINESS OF HIRE PURCHASE AND FINANCE ETC. IN THE YEAR 2001 WHEN SOME OF OUR INVESTORS HAD BEEN LODGED FIR AGAINST PARTNERS AS W ELL AS FIRM OR FIRMS DUE TO SOME PANIC AS WELL AS SENTIMENTAL DIFFERENCE S BETWEEN PARTNERS AND THEM. THEREAFTER OFFICES OF FIRM OR FIRMS HAD B EEN CLOSED SINCE 2001 AND ALL THE PARTNERS HAD BEEN GONE TO UNDERGROUND. IT IS MATTER OF RECORDS WITH INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT THAT WE HAVE ALREADY CHA NGED OUR AFORESAID ADDRESS BECAUSE OF CONVENIENCE OF SERVICE OF NOTIC ES AND THIS ORDER IS ALSO RECEIVED BY US THROUGH INCOME-TAX DEPARTMENT AT OUR PARTNER'S RESIDENCE ADDRESS. UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES IT WOULD BE APPRE CIATED THAT THE DEFAULT HAPPENED ON ACCOUNT OF A BONAFIDE AND PARDONABLE DE FAULT OF NON-RECEIPT OF NOTICE OF HEARING IN THE INTEREST OF EQUITY AND JUSTICE. 4. IT WOULD THUS BE SEEN THAT THE REASONABLENESS FOR DEFAULT OF CAUSE IS TO BE SEEN ON THE LAST DATE OF HEARING AND NOT ON T HE EARLIER DATES. IT WAS SO HELD BY CALCUTTA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF SOURA V JHUJHUWALA VS. CIT CITED AT 273 ITR 225 WHERE THE RATIO GIVEN BY THE HONBLE HIGH COURT THAT THE CAUSE FOR NON-APPEARANCE SHOULD BE SEEN. IN THE WORDS OF HIGH COURT THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD OBTAINED ADJOURNMEN T EARLIER OR THE TRIBUNAL HAD SHOWN LATITUDE IN GRANTING SUCCESSIVE ADJOURNMENTS WOULD BE IMMATERIAL FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSIDERING AN APP LICATION MADE UNDER THE PROVISO TO RULE 24 FOR THE PURPOSE OF RESTORING AN APPEAL. THE TRIBUNAL HAS TO EXAMINE WHETHER THERE WERE SUFFICIENT REASON S PREVENTING THE ASSESSEE FROM APPEARING WHEN THE APPEAL WAS CALLED ON FRESH HEARING. IF THERE ARE SUFFICIENT REASONS AND THE TRIBUNAL IS SA TISFIED WITH THE REASON THERE IS NO ALTERNATIVE BUT TO RESTORE THE APPEAL. 5. IT WOULD BE THEREFORE APPRECIATED THAT THE O RDER DISMISSING THE APPEAL EX-PARTE IS REQUESTED TO BE RECALLED IN THE INTERES T OF EQUITY AND JUSTICE. MA NO.05(ASR)/2016 ARISING OUT OF ITA NO.255(ASR)/2016 ASST. YEAR :1997-98 3 IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE SUBMISSIONS THE LEARNED COUNS EL FOR THE ASSESSEE PRAYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 16.09.2 015 MAY BE RECALLED FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION ON MERITS TO WHICH THE LEAR NED DR DID NOT OPPOSE. 3. WE HAVE HEARD THE BOTH PARTIES AND HAVE PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. HENCE WE ARE SATISFIED WITH T HE EXPLANATION OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR NON ATTENDANCE ON THE SCHEDULED DATE OF HEARING. THEREFORE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE WE RECALL TH E AFORESAID ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 16.09.2015 AND DIRECT THE REGISTRY T O FIX THE MAIN APPEAL FOR HEARING ON 30.11.2016. 4. IN THE RESULT THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FI LED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 30 .09.2016. SD/- SD/- (T. S. KAPOOR) (N.K.CHOUDHRY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIA L MEMBER DATED:30.09.2016. /PK/ PS. COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: (1) THE ASSESSEE: (2) THE (3) THE CIT(A) (4) THE CIT (5) THE SR DR I.T.A.T. TRUE COPY BY ORDER